Advice on engine selection for Sonex post-turbo announcement

[sonex1678]

I am new forum user (first posting), but have followed the forum for some time and find it to be a great source of valuable information. As such, I am going to ask you experienced Sonex builders/pilots for thoughts on the new turbo offering. I recently ordered my Sonex kit (#1678--delivery shortly after the next builder's workshop) with the aerovee selected as the engine of choice based upon the turbo now being available, but have some concerns about my selection as the turbo is a very new offering. I would be very interested and appreciative if some of you long-time builders/pilots would share your thoughts on the aerovee turbo offering and discuss if you would consider it if you were building your aircraft at this time (in terms of increased/decreased HP/performance and reliability as compared to your current engines). I realize that your responses will be subjective, but as experienced builders and pilots your thoughts and opinions would be of great value.

[Sonex1517]

I'm biased, but I am finishing up Sonex 1517. I am currently building an AeroVee and purchased the Turbo.

Hopefully I will have it by Thanksgiving.


Robbie Culver
Sonex 1517
Chicagoland
Tails and Wings complete - finishing fuselage.
N1517S reserved

[rizzz]

I have already made my engine choice but I would have seriously considered the Turbo AeroVee if it was available at the time.

That said, I am an Aussie builder and since I made my choice I have learned some hard lessons about what it actually costs to land an aircraft engine from the U.S. in Australia.
The Turbo package turned out to be more expensive than Sonex originally indicated (about double the price) and hence I think for us Australian builders the total cost of getting it shipped to us with import taxes, customs costs etc., would be very close to purchasing a locally produced J3300, here’s an estimate based on what I paid to get my engine shipped to Aus (all in USD):

AeroVee Turbo: $11000
Crate & fumigation: $500
Shipping cost incl. insurance: $1500 - $2500
GST (calculated on the “landed cost” above): $1300-$1500
Customs charges (incl. AQIS container charges, quarantine, local port charges, booking fees, …): $2000-$3000
Customs agent charges: $200
…

(any Aussie builder who has imported large/heavy expensive items can confirm/deny my findings above off course)

That’s getting pretty close to the cost buying a locally produced J3300…

BTW, in hindsight purely from a cost perspective I believe I should not have chosen a VW (non-turbo charged) engine at all as buying a locally produced J2200 would have costed me about the same as what it cost me to import land a VW aircraft engine from the U.S.

[Fastcapy]

-----

[MichaelFarley56]

I've been flying my AeroVee powered Waiex for almost 3 years and nearly 130 hours. I love the airplane and find the AeroVee a good choice for the airframe, especially if you're like me and are building on a budget.

Like others, I would have purchased a Jabiru 3300 had I been able to afford it, but at nearly $20,000 for a new one, it simply wasn't in the cards for me. Having flown in Jabiru 3300 powered examples I tell people the obvious; a Jabiru 3300 powered Sonex is a real performer!

That being said, I've always been pleased to fly behind my AeroVee and love the cost, as well as the ease of operation. Please bear in mind that I live in Ohio where I'm only at 1000' MSL and the vast majority of my flying is solo. If I live at a higher elevation or routinely fly at nearly gross weight, I would have possibly reconsidered the Jabiru 3300.

As is, my Waiex normally climbs at around 800 feet per minute and will cruise around 125-130 miles per hour.

Like Robbie, I've followed the turbo project since the beginning and ordered my turbo kit at Oshkosh this summer. In my humble opinion, I honestly think the turbo AeroVee at 100 h.p. will be the perfect match for the airframe. If I'm able to gain a few hundred feet per minute climb and pick up 20 miles per hour in cruise, I think that's ideal. Plus, the AeroVee is simple and parts are cheap, and I really like the fact that those variables won't change!

I'm very excited for the installation of the turbo and can't wait to add the turbo to my Waiex. If you're just now starting the build, you do have the advantage of holding off on the engine purchase for a while so us "early" turbo guys can test things out before you make your final decision.

Either way, best of luck! I'm sure this subject will be talked about A LOT in the next 6 months!

[radfordc]

There is always a risk being an "early adopter". You could just start with the basic Aerovee and then upgrade to the turbo after it has been proven to work in customer airplanes.

[sonex1678]

I want to thank everyone who replied to my inquiry about their thoughts on the new turbo aerovee--as a result, I am much more comfortable with my preliminary decision to plan for the turbo. As suggested, I will wait to order the engine until it is needed, allowing some time for the earliest adopters to provide feedback on their experiences. I can then make my final determination based on a little more data. I would certainly prefer a little more HP than the standard aerovee (I'm not the smallest guy in town) and think I can swing the 3300 if need be, but as several of you noted, cost is always a consideration (especially for retired folks) and even if I can afford the upfront purchase, life cycle cost is also important; and, with the simplicity and low parts cost of the aerovee, if the turbo package is what we hope that will be the way to go for me.

Again, thanks for the advice and insight (Michael's info on importing associated costs is surely of great interest to those outside of North America) and especially thanks for the general tone of everyone response--it sounds like everyone is very enthusiastic, which makes me look even more forward to the whole Sonex experience.

Also, if there are any 3300 operators that would be willing to comment, it would be interesting to also hear your thoughts....

[Andrew]

Hello .. help,
I'm in the process of finalising a purchase of a Sonex with Aerovee engine installed.
In looking at different Sonex planes I see quite a few comments WRT the engine being underpowered for the Sonex.
I would like to know from you guys that have initially installed the Aerovee how many of you have changed engines to something different and what have you installed and are you happy you made the change?
What is the performance like with your .......installed engine.

What is the ideal HP / Engine for the Sonex?
Waiting in anticipation

Andrew

[LarryEWaiex121]

Andrew,

Let me start off by saying that power in an airplane is very much like a drug. A guy always wants more.
That said, I believe its very possible to be happy with even a minimally powered airframe. You simply learn to use it differently.
My Waiex has the Jabiru 3300 and I've often times found myself quite frustrated that I can't just approach a ridgeline and haul back and fly over it like I got a Pratt&Whitney PT6 in the nose. Yes, you have power, but you also have to manage HEAT! It can be very easy to overtemp a Jabiru by leaning on the throttle too hard and pulling the nose to high.
Because of the lay of the land where I live, your always crossing mtn ridges if you want to fly east/west. I'm one of those guys that hates a scenario where your climbing 60-90 degrees off the desired course because of terrain clearance issues. The reality of the matter is a guy hardly ever has to climb more than 5-10 minutes off course before you can roll back on course.
I'm certain if I had an AeroVee out here in the west where the average summer,day time, density altitude runs about 4,000-4,500' at ground level in N. Idaho I'd be getting pretty darned frustrated. If I lived in Missouri, not so much.
Last weekend I flew over into Montana and spent a considerable amount of time at 9,500 east bound and 8,500' westbound with and outside temp of around 56 degrees. Forgot to look at the DA but I can surmise it was around 9,200-9,400' at 8,500' indicated.
For those with AeroVee's I would be curious to know how they would handle that at a weight of around 1100 lbs?
I was running a constant 2760 rpm and truing 148 mph at 9,500'. Ground speed going east was 8-10 mph higher. About 135-138 going westbound at 8,500. Fuel burn for the entire trip came out to exactly 5.5 gph and I don't lean very agressively on hot days. In extremely cool weather where head temps run cool it would be very reasonable to get down in the 5.2- 5.3 range and never get egts over 1320.
This whole engine mess is a compromise and there are no pat answers that carry across to all users. Too much difference in where and how a guy flys to make hard statements.
Me, I like to push the lever forward hard and fly fast, even though I can feel the coins falling out of my pocket.

Larry

[MichaelFarley56]

Hello Andrew,

You raise an excellent question that, unfortunately, has no easy answer. For some help in providing you a better answer, let me ask you; where do you live? Are you flying mostly solo or with people? Local flying or long distance trips?

For me personally, I have been flying behind an AeroVee in my Waiex for nearly 3 years and around 130 hours. Living in Ohio where the field elevation is normally around 1000' MSL, I have no complaints with my AeroVee. Most of my flying is solo but even with someone with me, I find the performance of my airplane perfectly fine.

As an example, with just myself and a full tank of fuel on a cool day (950 lbs T.O. weight and 40 degrees F), I normally see 800-900 feet per minute climb rates and cruise numbers around 130-135 mph TAS. On the other hand, just last week I flew my airplane with a friend at 1150 lbs T.O. weight (slightly over the max factory recommended T.O. weight of 1100) on an 80 degree day, I was seeing climb rates of 400-500 feet per minute and around 128-130 mph TAS once leveled off.

Obviously my airplane doesn't compete with a Jabiru 3300 powered example in climb and cruise, but for my needs, all performance numbers are more than adequate. That being said, I do agree with Larry that the more power the better, so I'm looking forward to bolting on the turbo kit to my AeroVee this winter! Personally, I would have gone with the Jab 3300 from the beginning but couldn't afford it. I've certainly been happy with the stock AeroVee but can't wait for the added power the turbo will provide!

Does this help answer your question at all? What else can I help answer?

Thank you!